Multi-Site POS Revision Dated 01/19/19

[crvetter]

That’s a simple matter of requesting the 12/18/18 document from Florida dept of timeshares.

It doesn’t matter what they put on their website, or what they hand out for that matter.

The official language is the filed and approved language. If there were a legal issue regarding it, the Court is going to defer to the language approved by the state.

If they want to change it, they have to file the change with the state.

My discussions with DVC has so far been told that the paragraph in question that the appropriate documents have been corrected for the language in question. I was told the multi-site and BVTC are clearer now inline with what we see for the Riviera POS. I'm not sure how to check the Florida's website for approvals (stumbled upon it once on the DBPR once but can't find it now). But I suspect we might see it listed as approved eventually on the appropriate webpage. Perhaps they don't update these as soon as something is approved.

This is why so many people here thought they’d make Riviera the first leg of a “DVC2”, with some undefined mechanism for trading between the two. It’s a hard slog to do what they want to do within the rules laid down for reciprocity in BVTC between resorts.

I would argue that the board of each of the L14 resorts, controlled by DVC or not, has both a best interest and fiduciary responsibility to withdraw from BVTC if a new resort is allowed to affiliate at a disadvantage to current home resort owners.

This is where cheapening the value of resales comes directly into play. Those boards cannot allow that devaluing to come at the expense of the deeded interests of the members. They’d likely have a Court enforceable obligation to withdraw.

Now the new question you have posed with regard to all the Original 14 resorts agreeing to only enter BVTC if and only if their Resort Agreements were materially similar is another issue. I agree it is odd that our agreements stated this but Riviera no longer does. I wonder (I'm assuming it is yes) can DVC simply amend the Resort Agreements with BVTC similar to the way they can amend the POS?

 

[ziravan]

My discussions with DVC has so far been told that the paragraph in question that the appropriate documents have been corrected for the language in question. I was told the multi-site and BVTC are clearer now inline with what we see for the Riviera POS. I'm not sure how to check the Florida's website for approvals (stumbled upon it once on the DBPR once but can't find it now). But I suspect we might see it listed as approved eventually on the appropriate webpage. Perhaps they don't update these as soon as something is approved.


Now the new question you have posed with regard to all the Original 14 resorts agreeing to only enter BVTC if and only if their Resort Agreements were materially similar is another issue. I agree it is odd that our agreements stated this but Riviera no longer does. I wonder (I'm assuming it is yes) can DVC simply amend the Resort Agreements with BVTC similar to the way they can amend the POS?

There are changes posted to other items for Disney on DBPR dated as late as 3/1/19.

So. From at least 1/20 - 3/1, and counting, a case could be made for the original approved language.

 

[ziravan]

As far as altering the BVTC rules, this is where the difference between DVD and DVCM comes into play.

DVCM would have an obligation to act in members best interest, and by definition in the L14, that includes resale buyers.

DVD might be able to alter it, but DVCM would have an obligation to protect their members. Those positions being occupied by the same people is besides the point. If they wear two hats, they have to actually represent both hats.

 

[crvetter]

As far as altering the BVTC rules, this is where the difference between DVD and DVCM comes into play.

DVCM would have an obligation to act in members best interest, and by definition in the L14, that includes resale buyers.

DVD might be able to alter it, but DVCM would have an obligation to protect their members. Those positions being occupied by the same people is besides the point. If they wear two hats, they have to actually represent both hats.

Yeah but BVTC isn’t apart of either it’s its own for profit legal entity, at least that’s how it seems to me. We pay a negligible fee for being apart of it to get the service of exchanging between resorts. Up to Riviera it was always $1. So BVTC made the decision technically to allow Riviera to join BVTC itself. Though we now that is technically since all the leadership between the three companies are the same.

 

[TexasChick123]

I want to fight this on my VGC contract that was submitted on 2/12 and just passed ROFR because the language in the Muti-Site POS was wrong, and we could win, but I don’t see using my VGC points anywhere else.

 

[LAX]

I want to fight this on my VGC contract that was submitted on 2/12 and just passed ROFR because the language in the Muti-Site POS was wrong, and we could win, but I don’t see using my VGC points anywhere else.

What if there is another DVC at DL in the future? It will be excluded if these (and future) restrictions go uncontested. It's always better to have more options available even if you don't plan on using them. Sometimes, you just never know.

LAX

 

[TexasChick123]

What if there is another DVC at DL in the future? It will be excluded if these (and future) restrictions go uncontested. It's always better to have more options available even if you don't plan on using them. Sometimes, you just never know.

LAX

I hear you, but I was one of the few who actually contacted them and pointed out the misleading language. Should the issue arise in the future with regards to this VGC contract, I kept all my emails and kept a written record of the conversation. There’s not really a whole lot more I can do at this point short of taking legal action.

 

[LAX]

I hear you, but I was one of the few who actually contacted them and pointed out the misleading language. Should the issue arise in the future with regards to this VGC contract, I kept all my emails and kept a written record of the conversation. There’s not really a whole lot more I can do at this point short of taking legal action.

I didn't mean you as an individual, but if some of the members who practice law in real life (I don't!) and feel the points made have merit, perhaps we should take on DVD as a group? Maybe I have no clue what I am talking about, but I feel if DVD has crossed the line, something should be said/done about it. Hence, I really those of you who have made personal contacts to express concerns about this issue & the 2020 point allocation debacle.

LAX

 

[ziravan]

Yeah but BVTC isn’t apart of either it’s its own for profit legal entity, at least that’s how it seems to me. We pay a negligible fee for being apart of it to get the service of exchanging between resorts. Up to Riviera it was always $1. So BVTC made the decision technically to allow Riviera to join BVTC itself. Though we now that is technically since all the leadership between the three companies are the same.

Right but it doesn’t matter what BVTC does but how say BCV responds to it.

If BCV’s members are not allowed full access to the membership component of Riviera, then DVCM, or the board responsible for BCV, has a responsibility to the BCV membership not to allow Riviera full access to BCV. Even if that means withdrawing from BVTC as a result.

At issue is the deeded interest of BCV members, including resale owners. I would argue that DVCM and the Board for BCV have a legal responsibility to protect that deeded interest.

It’s not enough to say, “Well, neither resales have access after 1/19/19, so that’s parity.” They can remove membership as a deeded right from Riviera if they choose, but they cannot do so from BCV (as an example, any of the L14).

The deeded membership rights of BCV members must be treated the same across the board, and that means resale BCV members have the same rights in the club, no matter when they purchase. After all, if you buy a BCV contract today, you’re buying that membership, too. It’s contractually an appurtenance of the deed.

 

[ziravan]

Let me say this differently.

It's widely assumed that DVC intends to sell access to these 1/19/19 perk restrictions for a fee, at least to resale Riviera purchasers.

If DVC were to attempt to upcharge the L14 for access to Riviera under the BVTC, that amounts to reselling to them something that is already part of their deeds. Even if they only plan to upcharge Riviera owners, then DVC has attached a value to a right they are now denying deeded owners in the L14; a fiduciary responsibility to protect those deeded rights of L14 members would apply.

DVC can decide to sell Riviera with no deeded rights to membership. That's their sole discretion. What they cannot do is strip the deeded rights of membership that are already owned --- and legally transferrable -- by current L14 members.

If they want to restrict current L14 owners - and their successors with legally transferred deeded memberships - from exchanging into Riviera, then Riviera cannot be part of the same club as the L14; they need to create DVC2 for Riviera.

 

[crvetter]

Right but it doesn’t matter what BVTC does but how say BCV responds to it.

If BCV’s members are not allowed full access to the membership component of Riviera, then DVCM, or the board responsible for BCV, has a responsibility to the BCV membership not to allow Riviera full access to BCV. Even if that means withdrawing from BVTC as a result.

At issue is the deeded interest of BCV members, including resale owners. I would argue that DVCM and the Board for BCV have a legal responsibility to protect that deeded interest.

It’s not enough to say, “Well, neither resales have access after 1/19/19, so that’s parity.” They can remove membership as a deeded right from Riviera if they choose, but they cannot do so from BCV (as an example, any of the L14).

The deeded membership rights of BCV members must be treated the same across the board, and that means resale BCV members have the same rights in the club, no matter when they purchase. After all, if you buy a BCV contract today, you’re buying that membership, too. It’s contractually an appurtenance of the deed.

I would agree the only true thing DVCMC could do is pull a resort from BVTC. But then I’d ask the question is that what most members would want? Sorry just trying to think of all the arguments that DVC would use. Helps to ask everyone here so if I decide to contact DVC I’ve gotten a good footing on what everyone else thinks.

Also membership to the club is still attached to the Deed and can’t be removed still. However, they said membership in the club didn’t guarantee the right to trade into other resorts. So they basically diminished the meaning of the club by changing that in BVTC but everyone is still a member and that right is attached to your deed. Though the reservation component is not but then again without the reservation component what is the club? Also I wonder why Riviera pays 25,000 a year to BVTC to be a corporate member of the club when the other resorts paid a $1 only? Well BVTC took the breakage income though after we got our slice (believe still does for Riviera too).

I should say I overall do agree with your comments.

 

[ziravan]

Ok.

After Church, I spent some quality time in my Poly Component Site POS.

#1. Membership is expressly an appurtenance of ownership.

#2. Under Poly's Resort Agreement, page 3: 3.1(b) "That membership in the Club is an appurtenance to each Ownership Interest at the Polynesian Resort..."

#3. Poly Resort Agreement page 5: 6.1 "In the event BVTC associates one or more additional resorts as DVC resorts, the DVC resort agreement executed to effect each association shall be substantially similar to this agreement in all material respects under the circumstances pertaining to such additional DVC resort."

#4. Poly Resort Agreement page 6: 6.2(b) "The association of additional DVC resorts is not subject to the approval of DVCMC, the association, or any club member, and any decision to associate DVC resorts, including terms and conditions under which the DVC resort is associated, will be made by BVTC subject to the express written approval of DVD. In making a decision to associate additional DVC resorts, BVTC shall use its best efforts, in good faith and based upon all available evidence under the circumstances, to further the best interests of the Club Members taken as a whole and with respect to Club Members' opportunities to use and enjoy all of the vacation homes and related facilities made available through the DVC Reservation component."

Clear lines of thought here.

All L14 owners are club members, as an appurtenance of ownership. Each resort association and DVCM empowers BVTC to act as agents for the members for the reservation component. DVD empowers BVTC to add new resorts. BVTC has a contractual obligation to act in the best interests of Club members specifically with respect to furthering the best interest of Club Members to have opportunity to use all the vacation homes made available through the reservation component.

DVC/DVD/BVTC need to get their hats on straight.

What they are proposing is straight up in violation of the agreements they made with the L14 owners and their successors (resale buyers, aka, also owners). No amount of lawyering is going to get them around the express terms in bold above that say they have an obligation to club members as a whole to make the system available for all vacation homes in the reservation component.

Regardless what DVD wants to do to resales, DVCM and BVTC have legal and binding obligations to the membership as a whole, and that includes L14 resale owners both pre and post 1/19/19, aka "club members".

 

[Spartan86]

I apologize if this has been hashed out elsewhere in this thread. I've tried to follow along and I am by no means arguing the points made by anyone, especially our long time owners and attorneys. With that said, it seems the most recent iteration of the argument revolves around the nature of "The Disney Vacation Club" as an entity and our rights as members via deeded ownership. If I understand it correctly, a resort's admission to the club is governed by the Disney Vacation Club Membership Agreement with DVCMC assigned as "the agent" if you will. Then DVCMC via the DVC Resort agreement assigns BVTC as the "exchange agent" if you will. Attached are excerpts from the DVC Membership Agreement section 7.2 for Riviera, and section 10.3 from the Resort Agreement for Riviera. The question was asked earlier as to what DVC would argue in court as to their legal ability to restrict certain resale owners from Riviera. Would they not roll out the following language?

As an aside, I wonder if this 1/19/2019 restriction has been percolating in DVD/DVCMC's mind a little longer than we thought - the 10.3 language related to BVTC's discretionary rights first appeared in the CCV Master Declaration if my research is accurate. Every declaration since at least SSR has carried the 7.2 language in the DVC membership agreement, but the 10.3 in the Resort Agreement is relatively new.

Thanks for the discussion. I've had the opportunity recently to muddle through the Declaration for DRR and have learned a lot from that and from you all.

 

[ziravan]

I apologize if this has been hashed out elsewhere in this thread. I've tried to follow along and I am by no means arguing the points made by anyone, especially our long time owners and attorneys. With that said, it seems the most recent iteration of the argument revolves around the nature of "The Disney Vacation Club" as an entity and our rights as members via deeded ownership. If I understand it correctly, a resort's admission to the club is governed by the Disney Vacation Club Membership Agreement with DVCMC assigned as "the agent" if you will. Then DVCMC via the DVC Resort agreement assigns BVTC as the "exchange agent" if you will. Attached are excerpts from the DVC Membership Agreement section 7.2 for Riviera, and section 10.3 from the Resort Agreement for Riviera. The question was asked earlier as to what DVC would argue in court as to their legal ability to restrict certain resale owners from Riviera. Would they not roll out the following language?

As an aside, I wonder if this 1/19/2019 restriction has been percolating in DVD/DVCMC's mind a little longer than we thought - the 10.3 language related to BVTC's discretionary rights first appeared in the CCV Master Declaration if my research is accurate. Every declaration since at least SSR has carried the 7.2 language in the DVC membership agreement, but the 10.3 in the Resort Agreement is relatively new.

Thanks for the discussion. I've had the opportunity recently to muddle through the Declaration for DRR and have learned a lot from that and from you all.


View attachment 386080 View attachment 386082

First, what you posted, in both places, still places a requirement on BVTC to improve the quality of the membership as a whole. Stripping a whole class of members runs afoul of that obligation.

But see what I posted above as point #3. Poly's Resort Agreement requires that any subsequent resort agreement must be substantially similar in material effect to the other agreements.

If Riviera has a change that affects its members, that's DVC's business and between them and their new owners. If Riviera's Resort agreement differs substantially from Poly's, for Poly members at least, their agreement is going to control because they're entitled to a substantially similar Resort agreement from Riviera in terms of the effect on the reservation component.

 

[Spartan86]

First, what you posted, in both places, still places a requirement on BVTC to improve the quality of the membership as a whole. Stripping a whole class of members runs afoul of that obligation.

But see what I posted above as point #3. Poly's Resort Agreement requires that any subsequent resort agreement must be substantially similar in material effect to the other agreements.

If Riviera has a change that affects its members, that's DVC's business and between them and their new owners. If Riviera's Resort agreement differs substantially from Poly's, for Poly members at least, their agreement is going to control because they're entitled to a substantially similar Resort agreement from Riviera in terms of the effect on the reservation component.

Thanks @ziravan, I think I was composing as you were. I’m off to look at the sections you quote in my SSR agreement.

 

[Spartan86]

First, what you posted, in both places, still places a requirement on BVTC to improve the quality of the membership as a whole. Stripping a whole class of members runs afoul of that obligation.

But see what I posted above as point #3. Poly's Resort Agreement requires that any subsequent resort agreement must be substantially similar in material effect to the other agreements.

If Riviera has a change that affects its members, that's DVC's business and between them and their new owners. If Riviera's Resort agreement differs substantially from Poly's, for Poly members at least, their agreement is going to control because they're entitled to a substantially similar Resort agreement from Riviera in terms of the effect on the reservation component.

Not surprisingly, DRR’s POS changes a lot of this language. I suppose the argument to us (pre-1/19 owners) is that “we are not substantially changing your resort agreement as you have exchange rights, and for a long time to come that represents the majority of owners. So, we can claim although we have affected some, the majority still have similar rights as before”. But, any post 1/19 contracts will have addenda in the closing paperwork to sign which amends the resort and multi-site POS, resort and membership agreements with the new “vision”.

 

[ThinkBelieveDream&Dare]

Not surprisingly, DRR’s POS changes a lot of this language. I suppose the argument to us (pre-1/19 owners) is that “we are not substantially changing your resort agreement as you have exchange rights, and for a long time to come that represents the majority of owners. So, we can claim although we have affected some, the majority still have similar rights as before”. But, any post 1/19 contracts will have addenda in the closing paperwork to sign which amends the resort and multi-site POS, resort and membership agreements with the new “vision”.[/QUOTE]

Yikes Spartan86 Our contract recently passed ROFR (submitted after the 19th January deadline), and I have to admit I 'm now wondering what we're going to have to sign off on when our closing papers arrive as we will be considered 'minority' owners.

There's a part in our contract stating that we won't have access to any new resorts opened after 1/19/2019. This won't unduly concern us because we're never likely to want to stay at the Riviera or any other potential resorts.

Below is a section of our contract, can anyone please tell me, does this mean we will; or won't be able to book at any other of the L14 resorts?
I cannot find a definitive list of the Disney Collection.

2. MEMBERS WHO PURCHASE THEIR OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN ANY DVC RESORT FROM A PERSON OR ENTITY OTHER THAN DIRECTLY FROM DVD SHALL NOT BE ABLE TO USE THE VACATION

POINTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT OWNERSHIP INTEREST FOR RESERVATIONS OR STAYS THROUGH THE INCIDENTAL BENEFITS KNOWN AS THE ADVENTURER COLLECTION, CONCIERGE COLLECTION,
OR THE DISNEY COLLECTION. YOU WILL NOT HAVE ACCESS TO OTHER DISNEY VACATION CLUB INCIDENTAL BENEFITS (ALSO KNOWN AS MEMBERSHIP EXTRAS) SUCH AS MEMBER DISCOUNTS ON
DINING, SHOPPING, MEMBER-EXCLUSIVE EVENTS, AND CERTAIN SPECIAL MEMBER OFFERS. DO NOT PURCHASE YOUR OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN RELIANCE ON ACCESS TO OR THE ABILITY TO
TRANSFER THESE DISNEY VACATION CLUB INCIDENTAL BENEFITS. YOU WILL NOT HAVE ACCESS TO ANY DISNEY VACATION CLUB RESORTS DVD OPENS AFTER 1/19/2019.

3. Seller shall convey DEED, EXPIRES 1/31/2057 to Buyer (Trustee, Guardian's or Personal Representative's Deed to be used in event of Trust, Guardianship, or Estate). Property shall be free and clear of all encumbrances.

 

[keaster]

Yikes Spartan86 Our contract recently passed ROFR (submitted after the 19th January deadline), and I have to admit I 'm now wondering what we're going to have to sign off on when our closing papers arrive as we will be considered 'minority' owners.
There's a part in our contract stating that we won't have access to any new resorts opened after 1/19/2019. This won't unduly concern us because we're never likely to want to stay at the Riviera or any other potential resorts.

Below is a section of our contract, can anyone please tell me, does this mean we will; or won't be able to book at any other of the L14 resorts?
I cannot find a definitive list of the Disney Collection.

2. MEMBERS WHO PURCHASE THEIR OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN ANY DVC RESORT FROM A PERSON OR ENTITY OTHER THAN DIRECTLY FROM DVD SHALL NOT BE ABLE TO USE THE VACATION

POINTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT OWNERSHIP INTEREST FOR RESERVATIONS OR STAYS THROUGH THE INCIDENTAL BENEFITS KNOWN AS THE ADVENTURER COLLECTION, CONCIERGE COLLECTION,
OR THE DISNEY COLLECTION. YOU WILL NOT HAVE ACCESS TO OTHER DISNEY VACATION CLUB INCIDENTAL BENEFITS (ALSO KNOWN AS MEMBERSHIP EXTRAS) SUCH AS MEMBER DISCOUNTS ON
DINING, SHOPPING, MEMBER-EXCLUSIVE EVENTS, AND CERTAIN SPECIAL MEMBER OFFERS. DO NOT PURCHASE YOUR OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN RELIANCE ON ACCESS TO OR THE ABILITY TO
TRANSFER THESE DISNEY VACATION CLUB INCIDENTAL BENEFITS. YOU WILL NOT HAVE ACCESS TO ANY DISNEY VACATION CLUB RESORTS DVD OPENS AFTER 1/19/2019.

3. Seller shall convey DEED, EXPIRES 1/31/2057 to Buyer (Trustee, Guardian's or Personal Representative's Deed to be used in event of Trust, Guardianship, or Estate). Property shall be free and clear of all encumbrances.

Disney collection encompasses Disney Cruise Line and the WDW/Disneyland resorts that are NOT DVC villas. For example as a direct owner I can use points to stay at Art of Animation but I would not do that as the point requirements are crazy. You are not losing out on anything not being able to book those.

 

[ThinkBelieveDream&Dare]

Disney collection encompasses Disney Cruise Line and the WDW/Disneyland resorts that are NOT DVC villas. For example as a direct owner I can use points to stay at Art of Animation but I would not do that as the point requirements are crazy. You are not losing out on anything not being able to book those.

Thank you for your input keaster.
I'm sorry I wasn't more clear but I think you misunderstood my post. I've now edited the post to highlight the area in Spartan's post. This is the part I was referring to:
the majority still have similar rights as before”. But, any post 1/19 contracts will have addenda in the closing paperwork to sign which amends the resort and multi-site POS, resort and membership agreements with the new “vision”

I understand that as resale buyers we have no entitlement to Members Incidental benefits which you, as a direct buyer have.

My question about the Disney Collection referred to what is being called the Legacy 14 DVC resorts.
Once again, I do appreciate your help

 

[Spartan86]

What I wrote was purely speculative and I’m sorry if it worried you. By all means carefully look over your paperwork to make sure you understand it. You will be able to trade into the L14 with your contract but not be able to trade into DRR or any future resorts based on current language which is being disputed on this thread and could potentially change. My statement was a hypothetical version of how Disney might defend recent changes to pre 1/19 owners. Congratulations on your new contract.